PVP Update, June 2015

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

@ZOS_BrianWheeler
Welcome back great to see such a considered and info packed post.
I have a few questions and further discussion points if you have the time to reply. I'll try to go point by point for clarity.

i) 'Lag' Nice to hear an update on this. Glad your looking into similar areas as us players have been. We have been running recently 24v24's without caltrops and meteor and it just shows how much they contribute to the lag its playable when just those 2 skills are removed. I hope the change helps.

Q) Does this LOS change affect HoT/DoT type affects LOS checks (e.g. caltrops, banner , healing springs) which do damage or healing over time or is it only the AOEs like Impulse/ Tornado/ Sap etc.. which will be affected?

ii) Jump to friend restrictions - I'm unsure why you feel this is detrimental to the campaign system. people aren't really playing 'To Win' campaigns now. This won't change as there is no real benefit to doing so. This will prevent us from being able to hold player made events such as gvg on lower population servers to not adversely affect population and restrict the community. (I will make a suggestion as to campaigns, scoring and populations below).

iii) Buffs - Good but see suggestion below

iv) Emp Buffs - is there a reason why these couldn't be retained only within PVP? I'm not really a fan of removing PVP content from the game when we aren't seeing any new content. (whatever that content may be). If you wanted to make a change to this perhaps you could consider the buffs to only apply when there is an active emperor on your faction. Maybe a little flavour addition that pales in comparison to the Champion points power discrepancy.

v) Low Population - I'm not really a fan of this change, people can't take advantage of a lowpop campaign because they will now be locked to whatever their home or guests are. This will mean that people will either 'be lucky' and get on a campaign where they can farm with this bonus or not.

vi) Campaign Reassignment - I'd suggest not increasing the time on swapping guests. Why not make it so that players can either queue to their home or to a 'low pop' server thus giving a bolster to player numbers on a server if their home is full or 'bad' for gameplay at that time. This would remove the guest system and stop people from locking themselves when they swap to other factions. Swapping home cost is fine to increase.

vii)Scrolls & Gates - Please consider adding a 'grace period' (30m/1h) for people inside scroll areas when the gate is closed. It is a valid tactic to wait out the enemy and then steal it. I agree 'jumping' is exploiting but 'hiding' isn't.

viii) Combat changes - Waiting (can you ask them to post changes for review soon ^^)

ix) Scoring changes - This is the big one.

When it comes to scoring changes I have to ask what is the goal with campaigns. Do you want people to 'play' a campaign for the rewards at the end of it? because currently people don't. All that matters is AP. AP for gear. AP for Gold. AP for Ranking. AP for Emp (to make more AP).

The suggestion:

• Make all campaigns linked.
• All Campaigns would have the same duration and same scoring pattern.
• The scores of all campaigns would add up for a 'factional score'.
• The 'winning faction' would gain certain benefits for a fixed amount of time (this can affect PVE!)

What this would achieve would be different environments and campaign 'powers' who nightcaps where etc.. but a much 'bigger' fight. Do you protect your 'buff campaign' or strike at the enemies. Do you aim to keep a balance, protecting a scroll on Thornblade but risk losing it on Azuras? All Guilds on a faction would be forced to communicate to a certain degree if they wanted their faction to succeed.

there could still be a 'home' and 'guest' type mentality if you wanted to retain that but I would encourage just moving a free choice system where players can choose where to enter to fight.

you could then start to introduce things like targeted campaigns - players would get a bonus for bolstering their faction on that campaign whilst still contributing to 'the fight'.

Note: you already have my suggestion about adjusting score with population numbers - this could still apply here (and would be a good addition imo).

Short version: 'Home keeps' give different points for 'home faction' compared to 'attacking faction' based on population. So if EP owns alessia it gives more points the more AD there are on the campaign but not as much as if AD owned it.

x) Other changes and things not mentioned.

• players should be rewarded for actual pvp participation some sort of either daily or AP/ Ranking wise reward. not the tier system that can be completed in 1h.
• Balancing Considerations: Ball of Light, Nirn, perma dodge, zerg proxy deto, steel tornado range, barrier numbers (reducing amount of players receiving the effect), wrecking blow and snipe 'gameplay'.
• Champion points 'limit' campaigns.
• (finally) Content - you have already talked about this but any updates always good

Thanks for your time - I appreciate this is a massive post. If you reply to any of it I'll still be happy.

Izanagi

nikolaj.lemcheb16_ESO

What does "near the end of the campaign" exactly mean?

It is one day before, 20 min before, 1 day after?

We talked about it in guild chat and no one had a clue?

Renan

Aany pvp incentive you could have will no longer exist if you remove the former emperor bonus. You will make pvp for one dye? I do not think so. Master weapons? VDSA is much easier

ThatNeonZebraAgain

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Atropos wrote: »

Hey @ZOS_BrianWheeler, thanks for sharing the details of PvP changes, your post has a lot of great solutions to current problems. I'd like to echo @Erlex' comment, though, about the importance of restricting the ability to resurrect at keeps that are severed from the transit network.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have talked about removing the ability to respawn in enemy controlled keeps if they are not connected to a transit line, but hasn't gotten any traction other than discussions at the moment.

I assume you mean "friendly controlled keeps that are not connected to a transit line". I'm really concerned how this idea has "not gotten any traction". It makes no sense to be able to respawn at a keep your alliance cannot transit to, as it completely sabotages the strategic importance of the travel network. As long as death remains a free and useful means of fast travel "blood porting" will remain a valid Cyrodiil strategy. I don't see how this creates satisfying gameplay.

The design of the transit system clearly implies that you have thought about these issues. You don't want players to be able to teleport into keeps that are actively under siege, or deep within enemy territory. So ... don't let them!

I really don't see how there is even a possible counter-argument to this.

Removing the ability to spawn at disconnected keeps would also change another aspect of the Cyrodiil map.

The two gate keeps of each faction (Rayles, Warden, KC, Farragut, BB, BM) become near impossible to for any long term period of time. If enemies can only respawn at a captured Arrius, Glademist, of Faregyl, it becomes simply a matter of time before the native faction overwhelms the force camping their gates and then closes them.

Pushing for the scrolls would require a concerted organized effort most of the time, as you'd be unlikely to retain those gate keeps without babysitting them or keeping the enemy so busy (defending scroll temples for instance) that they're not attacking the gate keep.

It would also give the faction defending their scrolls much more time to rally and counter attack after any failed attempt to push the gates or take the temple.

Sounds like a great change to me. Scrolls and keeps flip way too fast for my liking.

Kas

bye bye former emp buff

but if that's what it takes, I'll glady give it up. I agree with @Eucken and others that the buffs aren't actually that big of a deal. i had TONS of fun going beyond my comfort zone to push for my own or guild mate's emp title. however, I still see how people want them and it is one incentive for flipping all emp keeps late at night or early in the morning. with that and buff campaigns gone, who knows how pvp will change.

tbh i'm not sure it's already enough but i'm still looking forward to seeing the results.

that being said, i'm a bit disappointed that there are no plans to change the "game of farming AP". Right now, especially if groups are involved and even more so if those groups approach raid size, it's all about getting to the best places quickly, being lucky with enemy (and especially own faction competitor's) movement and only relatively little about actual fighting capabilities. if have had nights in groups that were mediocre at best sitting at almost 100k AP/h over a long time and I have been in great groups wiping everything up tp raids as 5-10 but sitting at ~20k/h just because so few fights were found that night.

while most players that enjoy fighting over moving strategically ask for arenas, I've always hoped to find that in Cyrodiil through future alliance war changes.(imho arenas would be fun for a few days and than the biggest "class X OP" spam we have ever witnessed will start)

tinythinker

PeggymoeXD wrote: »

I will say that Guard and Prox Det need to be tweaked as "zerg busting skills"

Guard is basically useless and Proximity Detonation is about the same if one person is casting it in a zerg. The only use for it now are for sorcs and sometimes sypher fanboy nightblades. No offense sypher you're awesome. And when an entire zerg uses it, there is no escape. I think the damage needs to scale off of players inside the AoE. If it hits one person and everyone manages to escape the AoE, it doesn't hurt too bad, but you've managed to split the zerg up some. But if it hits 10 people at once then I think the damage should increase for every player it hit. Also nobody wants to use a skill point on a skill that costs stamina, doesnt allow stamina regen while toggled, and causes you to lose stamina while using it. That's just too much stamina.

Yup, if it did 800-1000 points damage per person (with relatively high spell damage/magicka pool on the part of the caster) to each person in the radius when it went off, then one person getting hit with it wouldn't be so bad and would not be worth casting, but if the target was stacked tight with 14 other people the 12,000-15,000 damage would sting and would be worth the cost/cast time. Might be worth running into a group of 6 for 4800-6000 damage with Prox Det. Doing 6,000-10,000+ damage on a single target with the skill, though, doesn't seem to match its original intention.

BigTone

I don't like the whole concept of "blood porting". You should not be rewarded for dieing. I love the idea of not be able to rez at a keep that is cut off from transit. I also like the idea of not being able to port/rez at a keep unless you have 2/3 resources.

tonemd

Eucken wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to clarify, you will keep the Emperor Dye and "former emperor" titles.

do you really think thats incentive enought for the average player to become emperor once @ZOS_BrianWheeler

The emperor should not only be given incentives to keep his buffs but also be given the skills to do so. If the Emp skill line access is going to be so finite maybe it should be augmented for the active Emperor. Those mercenaries that were removed, maybe the active Emp could be the only one to deploy them.

I would still like to see the different campaign scoring systems add up to one overall campaign score and an overall faction winner announced at the end of the 30 day campaign INSTEAD of limiting campaign movement, but lets see what happens. If removing travel to players cracks down on EP guildies jumping onto AD toons and double teaming DC then I'm all for it.

xaraan

wanderlustx5 wrote: »

I agree with almost all changes except decreasing home campaign switch cool down to 12 hours, it should stay 3 days to prevent cross campaign zerging. All other changes rock! This is awsome and I feel some of the concerns are addressed. Zergs will still roll with aoe's though so perhaps a nerf just in cyrodill to the purge skill (so as not to affect pve use). No purge = zerg death

I agree. There is too much of a mega guild zerging a home campaign and deciding to travel around to others and zerg them as well. I don't even think there should be guest campaigns. Maybe let someone guest for free if they don't have a home campaign chosen (and aren't earning AP toward rewards there) and check out different campaigns, but once you pick a home campaigns it is done until that campaign ends.

Benawaw89

xMovingTarget wrote: »

Benawaw89 wrote: »

my former emperor buff is gone i worked so hard to get that emperor. now only RED emperor color left

imo emperor buff isnt a game changing, its a reward for hardwork becoming empeor. imo it should be just there.

You and me, we used to be together
Every day together, always
I really feel that I'm losing my best friend
I can't believe this could be the end

It looks as though you're letting go
And if it's real, well I don't want to know

Don't cry
I know just what you're saying
So please stop explaining
Don't tell me 'cause it hurts

that s just like you and me , the time you leave me alone

Fordd

@ZOS_BrianWheeler Can you guys re-evaluate the "pvp rewards" that are sent to us in the mail? Everything except for the soul gems and gold are pretty much useless. All they really accomplish is spamming my inbox.

- Maybe lower the frequency we receive these mails, but increase the amount of gold and soul gems?
- Maybe give a slight chance to receive a "cold fire" siege weapon?
- Maybe remove the default "green leather belt of uselessness" and reward us with a random PvP reward box (the ones you buy from pvp vendors)?
- Maybe a 1% chance to receive one of these xp bonus potions?

Thank's. Also...any sort of time frame for the implementation of these "fix's" would be great...even if its "we hope to have these on the PTS in the next 4 months"

Atropos

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Removing the ability to spawn at disconnected keeps would also change another aspect of the Cyrodiil map.

The two gate keeps of each faction (Rayles, Warden, KC, Farragut, BB, BM) become near impossible to for any long term period of time. If enemies can only respawn at a captured Arrius, Glademist, of Faregyl, it becomes simply a matter of time before the native faction overwhelms the force camping their gates and then closes them.

Pushing for the scrolls would require a concerted organized effort most of the time, as you'd be unlikely to retain those gate keeps without babysitting them or keeping the enemy so busy (defending scroll temples for instance) that they're not attacking the gate keep.

It would also give the faction defending their scrolls much more time to rally and counter attack after any failed attempt to push the gates or take the temple.

@Agrippa_Invisus, The scenario you just described sounds exactly like how Cyrodiil dynamics should work. It should be extremely difficult to hold the gate keeps. This naturally balances the map, gives a natural equalizer to the losing faction, and prevents people from rage-quitting or skipping to a different campaign. Pushing for scrolls should require a concerted effort. Scroll caps are too frequent at the moment.

Publius_Scipio

This thread is a huge positive for ESO. Definitely like the idea with how emperor/former emp will be handled. Makes being emperor meaningful and will force players to really stick with it with if they want to keep that skill line.

However, what if an alliance mutinies against their emp and allows another alliance to dethrone? That would suck for that person.

xaraan

BigTone wrote: »

I don't like the whole concept of "blood porting". You should not be rewarded for dieing. I love the idea of not be able to rez at a keep that is cut off from transit. I also like the idea of not being able to port/rez at a keep unless you have 2/3 resources.

I hate blood porting as well, but think that without camps and other travel options, keeps would fall too easily, esp cutting off transit with only 2/3 resources. They are already pretty easy to take with a small team without a big response from the other side.

I wouldn't mind seeing them (almost) end blood porting (but keep 3/3 resources) by flagging keeps on the map at like 25% damage on outer/20% inner giving people more time to ride there. At this point, even if you decide you need to port, getting somewhere, dying, and hoping to get in under the timer can be close, I don't think many would even try unless they were already in the middle of a fight if they keep was flagging that quick. It would also give the other side a bit more time to respond, which I think is needed in a map the size that it is.

tinythinker

Valnas wrote: »

the zos motto is if you can't fix it, remove it.

Former Former Emperor (single player objective)
Former Forward Camps (fast transit and pace of play)
Former Mercenary contracts (population)
Former Ground Oil (lag/congestion of groups)
Former Oil Catapult no purge
Former 100% heal debuff

You had a bunch of mechanics that worked and allows small groups and large to impact Cyrodiil, removed them do to feedback from 'players', and wonder why the game struggles to perform at the level it used to and why play has turned into tho zergs seiging each other.

I am all for getting back mercenaries and no-purge oil cats (the latter could scale snare percentage based on the number of people hit up to 70%). Not so sure about forward camps and ground oil. No real opinion on former emp buffs/100% heal debuffs atm.

emma666 wrote: »

Brian Wheeler says this is a PvP update with new implements, when in reality it's just more removal of things they didn't know how to fix or balance. Yet people are cheering. I don't get it.

Some people think the changes will help, some are glad ZOS is actively working on PvP and communicating their plans to the players. I would rather take a few things out if performance improves than see performance issues kill what is left of PvP, but I would prefer the system be upgraded to allow some of those things back in at some point. Otherwise it just will become too little (literally), too late.

Erlex

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Atropos wrote: »

Hey @ZOS_BrianWheeler, thanks for sharing the details of PvP changes, your post has a lot of great solutions to current problems. I'd like to echo @Erlex' comment, though, about the importance of restricting the ability to resurrect at keeps that are severed from the transit network.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have talked about removing the ability to respawn in enemy controlled keeps if they are not connected to a transit line, but hasn't gotten any traction other than discussions at the moment.

I assume you mean "friendly controlled keeps that are not connected to a transit line". I'm really concerned how this idea has "not gotten any traction". It makes no sense to be able to respawn at a keep your alliance cannot transit to, as it completely sabotages the strategic importance of the travel network. As long as death remains a free and useful means of fast travel "blood porting" will remain a valid Cyrodiil strategy. I don't see how this creates satisfying gameplay.

The design of the transit system clearly implies that you have thought about these issues. You don't want players to be able to teleport into keeps that are actively under siege, or deep within enemy territory. So ... don't let them!

I really don't see how there is even a possible counter-argument to this.

Removing the ability to spawn at disconnected keeps would also change another aspect of the Cyrodiil map.

The two gate keeps of each faction (Rayles, Warden, KC, Farragut, BB, BM) become near impossible to for any long term period of time. If enemies can only respawn at a captured Arrius, Glademist, of Faregyl, it becomes simply a matter of time before the native faction overwhelms the force camping their gates and then closes them.

Pushing for the scrolls would require a concerted organized effort most of the time, as you'd be unlikely to retain those gate keeps without babysitting them or keeping the enemy so busy (defending scroll temples for instance) that they're not attacking the gate keep.

It would also give the faction defending their scrolls much more time to rally and counter attack after any failed attempt to push the gates or take the temple.

Exactly.

Darklord_Tiberius

Alcast wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Will the PvE Leaderboards be reseted? Otherwise it is impossible to reach PvP Buffed Scores that are up on top there atm.

I am very happy now, thank you

Who cares? The PvE crowd has been abusing PvP buffs since the start. Nobody cares about that.

kaithuzar

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Can you make it so that scrolls & keeps get reset at the end/beginning of every campaign? This has been much needed/requested please.

Preyfar

Buff servers going away makes me insanely happy.

Darklord_Tiberius

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Great news and up coming changes!

Can I get a response on what and if anything is to change about the requirements to becoming Emperor are? As most of us can see, the lower day campaigns get flooded by people that legitimately never play there; they only come in to get one thing and that is the Emperor. Sure, removing the passives will help; but that really is not a solid solution to the overall problem. This addresses a significant issue of fair play and server balance for all alliances.

Grunim

kaithuzar wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Can you make it so that scrolls & keeps get reset at the end/beginning of every campaign? This has been much needed/requested please.

I would love this and something I miss from GW2 WvW where the reset allowed a mad dash to take keeps and resources and organized guilds and servers would hold meetings in advance to strategize. It was super fun to log in at reset time knowing the slate was clean and see if the pre-strategizing paid off or not.

tahoang1988

Nice. Can't wait to see these changes in action.

Prabooo

now PvP becomes interesting...

Draxys

Mr. Wheeler, I would encourage you to start thinking of incentives as opposed to deterrents. Give us better rewards for a campaign and we might actually stick to one. 3k gold and a few Cyrodiil's crest items? I will give you that giant middle finger right back, thank you. Give us gold jewelry, multiple gold upgrade materials, 10k+ gold, sweet costumes, more useful sets, etc.

Please do less removing of features and things (but still do some, not everything needs to stay), and implement incentives for things like sticking to a home campaign and running in smaller numbers.

kamarob14_ESO

The more I think about it even though I dont pvp I can just zone in take up the queue and find me a farm spot. So if your going to remove the buffs from pve might as well remove them for pvp players also.

Draxys

kaithuzar wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Can you make it so that scrolls & keeps get reset at the end/beginning of every campaign? This has been much needed/requested please.

^

Tigger62077

I really really hope that you completely remove everyone's home and guest campaigns when you do this. If you don't, those who need to change to match up with what their guildmates are doing will STILL be unable to do so. I have been unable to move for 8 months because of the inability to remove one's home and guess campaign settings. PvP MOVES. Factions move. Thorn was hella popular for regular pvp, and then there were the buff servers. So my characters who don't really PvP all that much except with certain groups in my guilds had their homes set in certain places...and now I can't move any of them because even if I HAD the AP, there's no place to move them TO in order to do anything since they are all vets. It really really sucks.

Ifthir_ESO

Thank you so much for this post @ZOS_BrianWheeler

Renan

PVE buffs are not the problem. The problem is the same zerg of the same faction, you know who, be able to enter in all campaigns

TheDarkWhiz

I really do not think getting rid of social jumping is a good idea.
I understand why it's being done - but that, along with increased guest campaign cool down, and increased AP cost to change home campaign is going to make casual PVP with friends very difficult for some people.

Since I don't believe in complaining without offering an alternative solution, might I suggest just putting a cool down on social jumping in PVP zones? Make it so that you can only jump into cyrodil once every 24 hours or even longer?

I just think it's going to feel lame not being able to join friends on a whim - especially for anyone with multiple PVP guilds who are active in different campaigns.